Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Riga domkyrka och mästaren från Köln

1942; Taylor & Francis; Volume: 11; Issue: 1-4 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1080/00233604208603330

1651-2294

Sten Karling,

Medieval Architecture and Archaeology

Summary On several occasions the Cathedral Church of Riga, St. Marien, has been a subject of archaeological study, but its history and the date of its building are still not definitely known. One particular subject of discussion has been whether the Cathedral was originally built as a hall or not. Freymuth and von Holst are of the opinion that it was designed as a hall as early as in 1211, and Schrade, who weighs the pros and cons in great detail, considers this possibility to be not entirely out of the question. Neumann, Kjellin and Clasen, however, assert that the Cathedral was originally constructed in the form of a basilica and was later changed to a hall. Opinions differ, however, as to when this took place and how much of the edifice was built to the original designs. According to Neumann, the chancel and transept, as well as the north part of the east abbey wing, were built in 1211–1215, after which the main body was begun as a hall in 1215. Kjellin holds that not only the east portion but also the walls of the body of the church were built on the lines of the basilica design, but at the same time he states that the transition to a hall did not take place until the time of Archbishop Albert Suerbeer, i. e. about 1254. Clasen thinks it probable that the transition to a hall took place before the chancel was vaulted, maintaining that this was not done until about 1250. The conclusions to be drawn from our investigations are as follows: The present Cathedral had already been planned in 1211 by Bishop Albert, but the work of construction was apparently not begun until after the Fire of Riga in 1215. The design, as it existed then, showed a basilica in the style of Saxony (Brunswick, Lübeck, Ratzeburg). The building material was cut stone. Chancel and transept were built up to a height of a few metres, and the construction of the west end with two towers was also begun. The work was probably interrupted by the death of Bishop Albert in 1229. Building was not resumed until the middle of the 1240s, when Bishop Nikolaus took it in hand. The mural work done in Bishop Albert's time was retained, but now the intention was to build a “hall church” (a church with the aisles of the same height as, and having a joint roof with, the nave). Here the material used was brick. The work proceeds without serious interruption and the chancel, transept and body of the church are completed. A start is also made with an abbey section, which was intended to comprise inter alia, a north cloister at the south side of the church. In its paired round‐arched windows, the pilasters, and, above all, the north transept gable, its wall decorated with a beautiful corn‐ear pattern, Riga's style of brick architecture is reminiscent of that of Ratzeburg. The transept gable is a more complex solution of the same composition that we find in the south vestibule at Ratzeburg. The east gable at Neukloster, in Mecklenburg, assumes an intermediate position between Ratzeburg and Riga. When the time came to build the arches there was a new architect and new builders. They were summoned by Archbishop Albert Suerbeer, formerly Dean of Bremen Cathedral and a native of Cologne, who had succeeded Bishop Nikolaus on his death in 1253. Archbishop Albert Suerbeer had designs made for a new Abbey, larger than that originally planned. Work on it was begun immediately and proceeded simultaneously with the building of the arches. The building as it was now being constructed had assumed a decidedly Rhenish character. The vaulting of the church was joined to the heavy square pillars by slender co‐Ionnettes with graceful capitals and bases. The arrangement is a Rhenish version of a Cistercian motif. We find a similar solution in Trier Cathedral. The fine north porch is likewise an entirely Rhenish composition. Rhenish too is the vast abbey building with its arcades, arches and details. Of this latter building only the cloister and the chapter house are still preserved. On account of external circumstances, however, it became necessary after some time to hasten the completion of the work. Already before, in order to save time, some of the cut‐stone details that had been originally planned had to be given up, and brickwork had to be employed to a great extent. Now even the size of the building had to be reduced. The plans for a new west end of the church are shelved, and instead the work of building up the walls proceeds on Bishop Albert's old foundations. But instead of two towers it is now decided to have one tower flanked by two chapels. The west wing of the monastery building is interrupted and carried down towards the southwest corner of the body of the church. In about the year 1270 the vaulted roof of the church was completed and the abbey establishment was likewise under a roof. Before the end of the century the upper parts of the west end were also ready. This brings to an end the essential phase of the architectural history of the church. At the beginning of the 14th cent. a vestibule was built in front of the north porch. In the 15th cent. the church was once more converted into a basilica, and chapels were added on to the church at the north and south ends. The great north porch of the church is one of the finest examples of the Rhenish style of porch that became widespread throughout Northern Europe during the first half of the 13th cent. It was built in the middle of the 1250s or shortly after. The fillets of the capitals are adorned with a tendril‐and‐leaf pattern, which is also of Rhenish origin. The same style characterizes the suspended colonnettes and the capitals and consoles of the abbey buildings. Most of the decorative elements have been executed by a master who undoubtedly played a leading part in the constructional work. One characteristic motif is the graceful tendril spirals that adorn the fillets on the left‐hand capital of the porch. The same motif, hewn by the same hand, we find on a capital in Haapsalu (Hapsal) Cathedral, which can be dated around the year 1270. It recurs on a baptismal font in Valjala (Wolde) Church on the island of Ösel. Here it is seen accompanied by an anthemion frieze. Both these motifs derive from the Late Romanesque style, chiefly from the Rhineland. In St. Andreas’ at Cologne we find them both, as also at Valjala, side by side and of similar execution. We have the same style in St. Kastor's at Coblenz, as well as on the north transept wing of the Cathedral at Mainz. The origin of the master, therefore, leaves no room for doubt and we have called him the Master from Cologne. An ornamentation consisting of standing leaves also belongs to the master's repertoire, as is shown by the font at Valjala and some capitals in Haapsalu Cathedral. A similar leaf ornament adorns the capitals of the Chapter House of Riga Cathedral, most of the suspended colonnettes in the Cathedral and is also employed in conjunction with the tendril motif on the capitals in the cloisters. Among the collaborators of the Master of Cologne we note especially a master with a Westphalian training, whose capitals harmonize with those on the north porch at Paderborn. The predominant part played by the Master from Cologne in the building of the Cathedral at Riga in the time of Albert Suerbeer would seem to justify the assumption that he was also the designer of the abbey there. Other buildings which may be ascribed to him are the Cathedral at Haapsalu and Valjala Church, both of which are reminiscent of Riga Cathedral. The same style occurs inter alia in the following churches: Ridala (Röthel), Kaarma (Karmel) and Kullamaa (Goldenbeck). Porches designed by the Master from Cologne or his assistants are to be found at Valjala, Kaarma, Ridala and Lääne‐Nigula (Pönal). The prototype was the (now destroyed) porch of Haapsalu Cathedral. The Master from Cologne can be followed all the way through Westphalia (Brechten), possibly, Osnabruck and Bremen, to Riga. One of his collaborators seems to have reached Riga by way of Visby. This might partly account for the points of agreement existing between the “bridal‐porch phase” in Visby Cathedral and the porch of Riga Cathedral.